Throughout the specification, we describe mascara formulations packaged in a multi-compartment package according to the present invention. However, the invention is applicable to any product that is suitable for use with a wiper-applicator system.
Containers that have a wiper element are well known in the art. A typical mascara package, for example, comprises a bottle capable of holding a quantity of mascara, a wiper disposed in the neck of the bottle and a closure-applicator that screws onto the neck of the bottle. The typical mascara package has a single compartment and is capable of holding only one formulation at a time. Thus, the preparation that reaches the consumer is the formulation that was filled into the single compartment package, at the filling plant.
In contrast, the present invention is a multi-compartment, wiper-applicator package. Throughout the specification, the phrase “multi-compartment, wiper-applicator package” refers to a package that comprises a container; a wiper that is sealed at both ends and that is disposed in an opening of the container; and a tool for removing the seals from the wiper. Further associated with the “multi-compartment, wiper-applicator package” is an applicator that accesses the interior of the container by passing through the wiper after the seals have been removed.
One of the advantages of the present invention, is the increased formulation flexibility provided by the multi-compartment design of the package. This increased formulation flexibility has advantages for the formulator, the manufacturer and the consumer.
Conventional mascara formulations include oil-in-water emulsion mascaras which may typically have an oil phase to water ratio of 1:7 to 1:3. Oil-in-water mascaras are typically comprised of emulsifiers, polymers, waxes, fillers, pigments and preservatives. These mascaras offer the benefits of good stability, wet application and easy removal with water, they are relatively inexpensive to make, a wide array of polymers may be used in them and they are compatible with most plastic packaging. There are also water-in-oil mascaras whose principle benefit is water resistance and long wearability. These mascaras may typically have an oil phase to water ratio of 1:2 to 9:1. Water-in-oil mascaras are typically comprised of emulsifiers, solvents, polymers and pigments.
In general, however, mascara compositions may also include ingredients whose efficacy or potency decreases with time. Thus, the time from filling the mascara container until the first use by the consumer, represents a loss of efficacy or potency. To compensate for this, a formulator may include more of the ingredient than is really needed by the consumer. For example, a lash curling enzyme may slowly breakdown in the mascara composition. To ensure that there is an efficacious amount of the enzyme by the time the consumer uses the product, extra enzyme may be put into the composition. This is an obvious disadvantage, as the enzyme may be expensive or the degraded enzyme may further disturb the chemical composition. Thus, it would be advantageous if the enzyme could be protected from degradation until the time of first use by the consumer.
Furthermore, a formulator may wish to include in the mascara composition, an ingredient that is reactive with the composition for some beneficial purpose. However, in some situations, it may be advantageous to delay that reaction until the time of first use by a consumer. That is not possible with a conventional, single compartment mascara container, but it is possible with the “multi-compartment, wiper-applicator package” of the present invention. Also, there may be other reasons for wanting to maintain one or more ingredients separate from the main mascara composition until the time of first use. Regardless of the reasons, such is not possible with a conventional, single compartment mascara container, but it is possible with a “multi-compartment, wiper-applicator package” according to the present invention.
There is an established vocabulary for discussing the performance characteristics of mascara compositions. Each of these characteristics can be evaluated and assigned a number on a random scale, from 0 to 10, say, for purposes of comparison during formulation. “Clumping”, as a result of mascara application, is the aggregation of several lashes into a thick, rough-edged shaft. Clumping reduces individual lash definition and is generally not desirable. “Curl” is the degree to which a mascara causes upward arching of the lashes relative to the untreated lashes. Curl is often desirable. “Flaking” refers to pieces of mascara coming off the lashes after defined hours of wear. The better quality mascaras do not flake. “Fullness” depends on the volume of the lashes and the space the between them, where “sparse” (or less full) means there are relatively fewer lashes and relatively larger separation between the lashes and “dense” (or more full) means the lashes are tightly packed with little measurable space between adjacent lashes. “Length” is the dimension of the lash from the free tip to its point of insertion in the skin. Increasing length is frequently a goal of mascara application. “Separation” is the non-aggregation of lashes so that each individual lash is well defined. Good separation is one of the desired effects of mascara application. “Smudging” is the propensity for mascara to smear after defined hours of wear, when contacting the skin or other surface. Smearing is facilitated by the mascara mixing with moisture and/or oil from the skin or environment. “Spiking” is the tendency for the tips of individual lashes to fuse, creating a triangular shaped cluster, usually undesirable. “Thickness” is the diameter of an individual lash, which may be altered in appearance by the application of mascara. Increasing thickness is usually a goal of mascara application. “Wear” is the visual impact of a mascara on the lashes after defined hours as compared to immediately after application. “Overall look” is one overall score that factors in all the above definitions. It is a subjective judgment comparing treated and untreated lashes or comparing the aesthetic appeal of one mascara to another. The ideal mascara will possess all of the desirable properties while avoiding the undesirable. Unlike a typical mascara package, the “multi-compartment, wiper-applicator package” of the present invention makes it easier to achieve the ideal mascara.
Wipers are well known in the art and are especially encountered in products where an applicator is immersed in a flowable preparation, like a lotion, or immersed in a pasty preparation, like mascara. A typical prior art wiper is shown in FIGS. 1 and 2. Broadly defined, the wiper (100) is a hollow cylinder. The typical wiper has one retention bead (101). When the wiper is fully seated on a mascara container, the bead fits into a complimentary retention groove located on the inner wall of the container neck. The bead and neck groove stabilize the wiper in the container neck by opposing any movement of the wiper, as for example, when a brush passes through the wiper. A lower section (102) of the wiper is tapered such that it has a smaller diameter than that of the upper section (103) of the wiper. The upper section terminates in an upper orifice (104) and the lower section terminates in a lower orifice (105). As commonly practiced, the lower orifice diameter is typically between 0.139 and 0.163 inches, although other sizes may be in use and the present invention is not limited by the size of the lower orifice. This range of orifice diameters accommodates most of the brush-rod applicator assemblies currently in use. The well known wiper as just described, is incapable of transforming a single compartment package into a dual or multi-compartment package.